Originally Posted by forgot to bid

So you take something that sucks and merge it with something that sucks?


I guess maybe a 787-200? A 767-200 replacement?

Originally Posted by Leeham News

A330neo

We’ve written extensively about both prospective airplanes, with the A330neo concept one of many subjects from the Airbus Innovation Days. The Reuters article reports what we have been hearing for some time: the airplane could be announced at Farnborough–but it might not be, either. What is new is the increasing likelihood Rolls-Royce will become the sole-source supplier. Aviation Week originally reported this prospect.


Our Market Intelligence suggests that RR will supply the Trent 1000 TEN incorporating elements of the Trent XWB to improve fuel burn and reduce weight. Airbus is also going to have new, composite nacelles to further reduce weight and improve efficiency, according to our Market Intelligence. Incorporating sharklets will add a few percentage points of fuel savings to the long-range cruise. We’re skeptical of the estimated 14%-15% fuel savings claimed in the Reuters article–this number, if it is achieved, would have to come for the longest range rather than the 2,000nm Airbus likes to promote as an average mission.

We concluded last December that Airbus must proceed with the A330neo. Our A330neo Study points out that Airbus faces a production imbalance with Boeing beginning in 2016, as demand for the A330ceo declines and Boeing ramps up production of the 787. Without an A330neo, by the middle of the next decade, Boeing would have two-thirds of the medium, twin-aisle production market, adjusted for ramp ups in the 787, 777X and A350 programs and declines in the A330ceo and 777 Classic lines.

Even with an A330neo, we believe Airbus will reduce production rates beginning in 2016. We predict Boeing will reduce rates for the 777 Classic beginning in 2017.

Our Study also concludes that Airbus pricing for the A330neo will be aggressive vis-a-vis the 787-8/9. With the A330 line essentially paid off and only about $2bn in incremental R&D cost for the A330neo (most of which likely to be paid by the engine OEM), Airbus’ ability to drop the price of the A330neo will far outstrip Boeing’s ability to match, unless Boeing prices for market share rather than profit.

As we reported in our Innovation Days postings, one trade Airbus has to consider is engine maintenance cost. Officials say the A330ceo, with a highly mature engine, has lower maintenance costs than the 787′s new GEnx and RR engines. The 787′s nacelles, with highly advanced materials, are said to be very costly to maintain and overhaul, according to Market Intelligence. Airbus acknowledged to us that this maintenance delta will narrow considerably for the A330neo.